Every breach that can cost you 30 days, 90 days, or the licence itself — mapped to the paperwork that prevents it.
Why this guide exists
In June 2026 the Department of Thai Traditional and Alternative Medicine issued a formal administrative guideline telling its own inspectors exactly when to suspend a licence and when to revoke it. Before that, enforcement varied by province and by officer. Now it does not.
The guideline covers every holder of a licence to research, export, sell, or process controlled herbs for commercial purposes. It operates under Section 52 of the Protection and Promotion of Thai Traditional Medicine Knowledge Act B.E. 2542, on top of the Notification of the Ministry of Public Health Re: Controlled Herbs (Cannabis), B.E. 2568.
This is the part most operators underestimate. The criminal fine for advertising is 20,000 baht. A 90 day suspension in peak season is a different order of loss, and revocation is the end.
The three forms that decide your fate
| Form | Thai | What it is | Who holds it |
|---|---|---|---|
| PT 27 | ภ.ท.27 | Movement and stock record for controlled herbs | Your premises, available for inspection |
| PT 28 | ภ.ท.28 | Periodic report filed with the registrar | Registrar, on schedule |
| PT 33 | ภ.ท.33 | Prescription issued by a licensed practitioner | One per retail sale of flower |
Most enforcement action starts with these three forms. An inspector who walks in and cannot see a complete PT 27, or who finds sales without matching PT 33 records, has everything needed to open a file.
Keep the paperwork reconciled weekly, not monthly. A stock record that does not match the shelf is the fastest route to a false reporting finding — and false reporting is a revocation trigger, not a suspension trigger.
Suspension for 30 days
Any one of these is enough:
- Reports not prepared. PT 27 and PT 28 not created, or created but incomplete, or not kept at the premises for inspection.
- Reports not submitted. Failure to file with the registrar.
- Standards failure. Selling or exporting controlled herbs that are not certified to Good Agricultural and Collection Practices, or to a standard equivalent or higher.
- Licence not visible. Not displayed openly at the premises, or you cannot produce it electronically when an inspector asks.
- Commercial advertising of controlled herbs.
Read that last line carefully. Advertising sits in the same tier as failing to file your reports. A single public price post is enough.
Suspension for 90 days
- Export details not notified to the licensor.
- Selling cannabis without a PT 33 prescription issued by a licensed practitioner.
Suspension periods are added together across all breaches found in one inspection, and capped at 90 days for a single order.
Immediate revocation
There is no warning tier for these. The guideline directs revocation on the first finding:
- False PT 27 or PT 28 reports.
- Sale without a PT 33 prescription to a protected group — anyone under 20, school or university students, pregnant women, breastfeeding women.
- On-site consumption. Allowing customers to smoke cannabis at the premises.
- Vending machines or automated dispensers.
- Online sales — through websites, electronic media, or any computer network. Messaging apps and forums are computer networks.
- Sale at a prohibited location — temple, dormitory, or public park.
And separately: a second breach of the same provision after a suspension puts the licence at immediate risk — the guideline says revocation will be considered immediately. Fix the root cause during a suspension, not just the symptom.
Reporting indicates a waiting period of around two years before a revoked operator may reapply. Treat a revocation as terminal for the entity and for the named responsible person.
Criminal exposure, running in parallel
Administrative action does not replace prosecution. It sits alongside it.
| Conduct | Penalty |
|---|---|
| Advertising controlled herbs, online sales, or sale without prescription | Up to 1 year imprisonment and/or 20,000 baht |
| Advertising cannabis food products | Up to 3 years imprisonment and/or 30,000 baht |
| Advertising cannabis herbal supplements or cosmetics | Up to 1 year imprisonment and/or 100,000 baht |
| False reporting or document forgery | Up to 3 years imprisonment or 60,000 baht |
Cross-border movement of flower without customs clearance is handled under the Customs Act, not the herb framework, and the exposure there is substantially higher. If you are exporting, get the customs position confirmed by a Thai lawyer in writing rather than relying on forum guidance, including this post.
Where the extracts rule now sits
Since 26 April 2026, cannabis and hemp extracts above 0.2 percent tetrahydrocannabinol are Category 5 narcotics under a separate ministerial regulation, published 26 March 2026. That is a different licence, a different regulator posture, and different penalties.
Flower stays under the controlled herb framework, tightened by Ministerial Regulation No. 2 B.E. 2569, published 30 April 2026.
If your business touches both, you need both compliance systems. Operators who assumed one licence covered extracts have been the ones caught out.
A compliance routine that survives an inspection
Weekly
- Reconcile PT 27 against physical stock. Investigate any variance the same week.
- Confirm every retail sale of flower has a matching PT 33 on file.
- Review anything your business published publicly in the last seven days against the advertising ban.
Monthly
- File PT 28 on schedule. File it even if the month was quiet.
- Confirm your Good Agricultural and Collection Practices certificates and your suppliers’ certificates are current.
Quarterly
- Walk your own premises as an inspector would. Is the licence displayed? Is there a menu board visible from the street? Is there anywhere a customer could consume on site?
- Audit your public footprint: website, social profiles, map listings, directory entries, forum posts.
Always
- Face to face, on licensed premises, prescription in hand. No exceptions, no favours for regulars, no deliveries.
What this means for how you post here
Asiannabis is a computer network. A sale concluded in a topic or a private message on this forum is an online sale, and an online sale is a revocation trigger.
You can discuss licensing, compliance, standards, export process, laboratory work, and regulatory interpretation freely — that is what this category is for. You cannot use it to move product.
We run automated compliance scanning across the forum and flag posts that read as sales or advertising. If your post is edited, it is because the alternative is worse for you.
The administrative process from first finding to final decision
Understanding the timeline between an inspection finding and a penalty decision helps operators respond rather than react. What the law does and does not fix is set out below.
Neither the Protection and Promotion of Thai Traditional Medicine Knowledge Act B.E. 2542 nor Ministerial Regulation No. 2 B.E. 2569 sets a fixed timetable from an inspection finding to an order; Regulation No. 2 (Royal Gazette, 30 April 2026) only changes licensing criteria and renewal. The general rule comes from the Administrative Procedure Act B.E. 2539 (Section 30): before an order that may affect a licensee’s rights, the licensee must be given an adequate chance to learn the facts and to respond with evidence, subject to limited exceptions such as urgency.
Answer any request for an explanation promptly, in writing, with copies of the PT 27, PT 28 and PT 33 records that address the finding. The length of a suspension follows the type of breach set out in the DTAM guideline of 22 June 2026 summarised above (30 or 90 days, capped at 90 days per order under Section 52 of the 2542 Act). No provision allowing written undertakings in place of a suspension has been found in the Act, the Regulations or the guideline as reported.
The order must be given to the licensee in writing. If the licensee cannot be found or refuses to accept it, the order is posted at the licensed premises and counts as received from that day (Section 55 of the Protection and Promotion of Thai Traditional Medicine Knowledge Act B.E. 2542). The licensee may appeal (อุทธรณ์) to the Committee under that Act within 30 days of being notified (Section 70). Filing an appeal does not stay the suspension or revocation, and the Committee’s decision is final at the administrative stage (Section 71). After that, the remaining route is a case in the Administrative Court, normally filed within 90 days (Section 49 of the Act on Establishment of Administrative Courts and Administrative Court Procedure B.E. 2542).
Appeals: what works and what does not
Appeals against suspension or revocation orders succeed primarily on procedural grounds—where the inspector lacked authority, the notice was defective, or the procedure was not followed—rather than on substantive grounds of proportionality. Thai administrative courts have historically deferred to the Ministry’s technical judgement on what constitutes a violation of health-related licensing conditions.
Grounds that have supported successful appeals in analogous cases under health licensing law: the inspection was conducted without proper identification or appointment (where required), the finding was based on a document that was later shown to have been forged by a third party, or the licensee was not given the legally required opportunity to submit a response before the order was issued.
Grounds that rarely succeed: “I didn’t know about the rule,” “the violation was minor,” “we have corrected the problem.” These are mitigation factors relevant to penalty reduction in criminal proceedings, not grounds for reversing an administrative order once properly issued.
Practical use of the appeal window: an appeal does not pause the order, so do not count on it to buy time. Use the 30 days to fix the compliance gaps and document each fix, so the appeal file shows that the problem has been closed.
Second offences and escalating penalties
As reported, the guideline says that if a licensee who has already been suspended commits the same breach again, revocation will be considered immediately, and that a different breach after a suspension brings a heavier measure. Separately, Ministerial Regulation No. 2 B.E. 2569 (clause 6) bars renewal for a licensee whose licence was suspended for breaching the Ministry of Public Health notifications on controlled herbs issued under Sections 44 and 45.
Treat any repeat of a breach you have already been suspended for as a revocation risk, and treat any suspension as a renewal risk: under clause 6 it can be the reason the licence is not renewed at the end of its term.
Keep a file of every inspection record, warning letter and written explanation you have sent. The published texts do not say how informal warnings are weighed, but a written record of what was found and how it was fixed is your best evidence if a later order is challenged.
What happens to stock and patients during a suspension
A suspended licensee must stop operating under that licence for the whole suspension and cannot obtain any other licence under the Act in the meantime (Section 52, paragraph 2). Continuing to sell or process controlled herbs while suspended is an offence under Section 78: up to 1 year in prison and/or a fine of up to 20,000 baht.
The published texts reviewed here do not say what must happen to stock held on the premises during a suspension. Do not sell, move or destroy it until you have DTAM’s answer in writing, and keep the PT 27 stock record up to date throughout.
Patients who rely on the dispensary for PT 33 supply will need another licensed facility while the suspension lasts. Tell existing patients directly and privately.
Planning for operational and financial continuity
The costs of a suspension extend beyond the direct revenue loss from not selling for 30 or 90 days.
Lease obligations continue during suspension. A lease that cannot be exited on 30 days’ notice represents fixed cost with zero revenue. Operators in new premises with long lease terms should negotiate suspension clauses into lease agreements at signing—this is unusual but not unprecedented for businesses in regulated industries.
Staff costs present a more complex problem. The DTAM-qualified staff must remain on the payroll or risk losing the credential coverage needed to reopen after suspension. Other staff face a different calculation. Operators who have over-hired relative to the revenue profile of a single-location dispensary will find that a 90-day suspension causes permanent damage to the team they have built.
Banking relationships: Thai commercial banks have become cautious about cannabis-related business accounts. A public suspension order—which is an administrative document and in principle accessible—may trigger a bank’s own compliance review of the account relationship. This is not widely publicised but has been reported by operators following the April 2026 regulatory tightening.
What operators can do to reduce risk before a formal finding is issued
The gap between a compliance problem existing and an inspector finding it is where proactive operators create the most value. An unannounced inspection does not happen on a fixed cycle—complaints from the public, signals from licence renewal documentation, or routine area sweeps can all trigger a visit. The practical implication is that compliance must be maintained continuously, not prepared for at inspection time.
Three areas where self-audit has prevented formal findings in similar regulatory environments:
Trained staff check: Since April 2026, Ministerial Regulation No. 2 requires at least one staff member trained by the Department of Thai Traditional and Alternative Medicine to be on site whenever a flower licensee is open (new clause 8/1(4)). A monthly check that this person’s training certificate is valid and that the rota covers every opening hour takes 20 minutes. A gap here is a licensing-criteria problem, and the same criteria apply again at renewal.
Premises integrity: The closed-premises requirement fails gradually. A door propped open for deliveries, a back window left unlocked for airflow, a customer who insists on seeing the stock room. Document a weekly premises walkthrough with photographs timestamped and stored. If an inspector later claims the premises were not controlled on a given date, the photographic log is evidence of routine compliance.
Document completeness: Licence, practitioner credential, stock records, PT 33 prescription log—all must be on-premises, current, and immediately producible during an inspection. A missing document that would otherwise be found compliant results in a provisional finding that the document does not exist, because the inspector cannot verify what is not shown. “It’s at head office” is not an acceptable response to an inspector asking for a stock ledger.
The difference between criminal and administrative tracks—and why both can run at once
A common misconception among operators is that receiving an administrative suspension order means the matter is “handled” at the administrative level and criminal exposure has been resolved. This is incorrect.
Administrative proceedings under the Ministerial Regulations and criminal proceedings under the Narcotics Code or the Protection and Promotion of Thai Traditional Medicine Knowledge Act B.E. 2542 are parallel tracks. An administrative finding of a violation triggers neither immunity from criminal prosecution nor a presumption of guilt in criminal proceedings. They are independent.
An administrative order does not rule out a criminal case. Where the same conduct may also be an offence, such as selling extracts above the THC limit without a licence, it can be reported to the police. We have not found a published DTAM or ONCB protocol that says how often this happens.
Operators who have received an administrative suspension and resolved it through the compliance process should nonetheless consult a Thai lawyer about whether any act underlying the violation also created criminal exposure, before the administrative proceeding is closed. The two-year limitation period on criminal complaints under Thai law means that the window does not close with the administrative proceeding.
After revocation: what cannot be recovered
Ministerial Regulation No. 2 B.E. 2569 does not itself deal with revocation or with reapplying. What it does say is that a licensee whose licence was suspended for breaching the controlled-herb notifications cannot have it renewed (clause 6). Reporting cited above indicates a waiting period of around two years before a revoked operator may reapply; confirm the exact rule with DTAM or a Thai lawyer before relying on a new entity or a change of management.
Staff who were employed by a revoked dispensary and who are themselves qualified practitioners can transfer their credentials and employment to another licensed dispensary without restriction—credentials are personal, not entity-bound. This means the human capital of a revoked operation is not permanently destroyed, even though the licence itself is.
Summary: the practical risk hierarchy
Not all violations carry the same real-world consequence. Operators with limited compliance budgets should prioritise in this order, from highest to lowest immediate risk:
Immediate revocation risk: false PT 27 or PT 28 reports; selling without a PT 33 prescription to anyone under 20, students, or pregnant or breastfeeding women; allowing smoking on the premises; vending machines; online sales; sale at a temple, dormitory or public park; and repeating a breach you were already suspended for.
90-day suspension risk: not notifying export details to the licensor, and selling cannabis without a PT 33 prescription. A 90-day suspension during the peak tourist months is an existential threat to a single-location operation.
30-day suspension risk: PT 27 or PT 28 not prepared, incomplete or not submitted; selling or exporting herbs without GACP or equivalent certification; licence not displayed; and any commercial advertising. Most of these are fixed by routine paperwork and by never posting prices or promotions.
Warning and notice risk: minor documentation deficiencies, isolated staff errors in customer communication, single post that crosses the advertising line without systematic intent. Serious as records, but manageable if the underlying behaviour is corrected immediately.
Sources (Final)
- Protection and Promotion of Thai Traditional Medicine Knowledge Act B.E. 2542 (1999), Sections 52, 55, 70 and 71
- Notification of the Ministry of Public Health Re: Controlled Herbs (Cannabis), B.E. 2568 — Royal Gazette, 25 June 2025
- Ministerial Regulation on Category 5 Narcotics, cannabis and hemp extracts, B.E. 2569 — in force 26 April 2026
- Ministerial Regulation No. 2 B.E. 2569 on licensing for controlled herbs — published 30 April 2026
- Act on Establishment of Administrative Courts and Administrative Court Procedure B.E. 2542 (1999), as amended, Section 49
- Department of Thai Traditional and Alternative Medicine. (2026, 22 June). แนวทางการออกคำสั่งทางปกครองในการเพิ่มโทษพักใช้และเพิกถอนใบอนุญาต [Guideline on administrative orders increasing licence suspension and revocation penalties].
- Narcotics Code, promulgated by the Act Promulgating the Narcotics Code B.E. 2564 (2021); in force 9 December 2021
General information, not legal advice. Confirm your own position with a licensed Thai lawyer before acting.